(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

The Big East wasn’t even looking to expand. The 8-8 balance was an insurmountable obstacle for the 2005-2012 Big East. I also think the football side was using their 1/8th share (as opposed to 1/10th or 1/12th in the other BCS leagues) to compensate for their lousy tv money.

In retrospect they probably should have offered UCF a football only membership in 2005. UCF was already in the non-football ASUN so it wouldn’t have upset the apple cart too much and it would have given everyone a trip to FL annually.

(12-20-2020 06:56 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  After getting screwed out of a bowl, maybe this changes Army's mind when it comes to being independent.

Would being in the AAC changed things? They had a bowl lined up it just got canceled

Army was left out because the remaining bowls had contractual agreements with conferences---so they were unable to take Army.

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

(12-20-2020 06:56 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  After getting screwed out of a bowl, maybe this changes Army's mind when it comes to being independent.

Would being in the AAC changed things? They had a bowl lined up it just got canceled

They also had six other teams that are going bowling. Granted it sucks to be SMU but that's one out of seven. Army would have a better chance of getting a bowl/better bowl in a conference than in an independent.

Assuming Army is not coming with the combo of VCU (and I don't foresee Army joining the AAC), the American needs to be ready for an all-sports member.

(12-20-2020 08:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Assuming Army is not coming with the combo of VCU (and I don't foresee Army joining the AAC), the American needs to be ready for an all-sports member.

Why not just add VCU and stand pat on the football side until a program worth adding emerges. I see VCU as a solid fit and adding value on day one. That makes sense as an immediate addition. Only BYU, Army, Boise, or maybe Air Force---would immediately on day one add value to the football side. None of those appear interested at this moment. Thus, there are really no programs that add football value on day one---so you stand pat on the football side. Its just the the way it is right now. No need to rush. Time is an AAC friend---not its opponent.

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just suffering though a rebuilding period. USF was 7-0 and ranked mid-season just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down in the conference cellar. Both are now on the upswing and doing quite well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

(12-20-2020 08:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Assuming Army is not coming with the combo of VCU (and I don't foresee Army joining the AAC), the American needs to be ready for an all-sports member.

Why not just add VCU and stand pat on the football side until a program worth adding emerges. I see VCU as a solid fit and adding value on day one. That makes sense as an immediate addition. Only BYU, Army, Boise, or maybe Air Force---would immediately on day one add value to the football side. None of those appear interested at this moment. Thus, there are really no programs that add football value on day one---so you stand pat on the football side. Its just the the way it is right now. No need to rush. Time is an AAC friend---not its opponent.

I would be fine with a VCU-only add at this point, but you and I (and probably Jed) seem to be in the minority on this A-Coog.

If the AAC is required by the NCAA to add a program for football title game purposes, I'm warming up the idea of either Buffalo or UAB.

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 06:57 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Until it happens, I struggle to see an A10 school jump to the AAC. Wichita State was a very unique situation, and their partnership with the AAC was a perfect combination of external factors occurring (AAC men's basketball under-performing, Wichita State have historic run and the bottom of the AAC failing to take step forward). If Wichita State had not had their stretch run (and get a subpar seed), would they have even been a candidate for AAC expansion? Probably not.

The Marshall scandal should, hopefully, encourage the AAC not to take a flavor of the month addition and look for an institutional fit that can be competitive in both football and basketball. No one that can add value is coming, so the league should look to replace UConn with a school that can develop with the league's resources and added conference exposure (i.e. a UAB or a Marshall).

Big East Football made the same mistake (waiting around for years for a perfect fit). The league could have easily added a UCF, a Memphis or a Houston, before the defections, and those programs would have grown under the Big East brand. Every year the AAC is without a 12th member, it's a lost opportunity for some program to be developing IMO.

Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

A Dayton-Army pairing would be outstanding. But I don't see it happening. Not sure either would be interested. Army has shown no interest up to this point. Dayton would be intrigued (it has a history with some AAC programs) but ...

The "coupling" that could happen and would add instant value to the American is AppState for football only and VCU for all sports but football. Those two schools would be very interested (at least on paper).

If it's one school only: either UAB or Buffalo would be a very solid add.

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Closing your eyes, crossing your fingers, and tossing a dart at the board of available "all sports" candidates with the hope that the random school selected will "develop" is an acceptable "expansion plan" in the same manner that buying 5 lottery tickets a week is an acceptable "retirement plan".

Thats not a plan. Thats just gambling. When a school that adds value on day one is interested in joining---thats when the AAC needs to get serious about replacing UConn. Until then, its simply impatience and poor leadership to illogically take a flyer on some random school because your too impatient to wait for a clear and obvious quality addition to emerge from the scrum.

As for taking an A-10 addition---I think massive change in coming to mid-major basketball. The trend is for fewer and fewer good OOC opportunities vs the P5----making the quality of the regular season schedule more and more important when it comes to at large bids. The only successful way forward in my opinion is for the top quality mid-major programs scattered over several conferences to coalesce together in the top conferences with other high end programs just outside of the P5. The AAC is the perfect vehicle for that purpose and would provide an excellent lifeboat for at most 1 to 3 top quality basketball programs.

Look---I dont think the AAC is ever going to be a SEC or Big East type conference with homogeneous strikingly similar peer schools all arranged within a tight common identifying geographic footprint. The AAC is always going to be a messy marriage of convenience where the only goal is to create the highest quality athletic league possible using nothing but left over parts still available after the P5 took what they wanted. lol---Its basically a conference run by Aresco, but built by MacGyver.

Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

Im not nearly as enthusiastic toward Dayton as VCU---but I'd agree its a viable option. I prefer larger public schools when possible. I just dont think Army is interested---so I tend to think its more of a fix what you can (basketball) situation and a time to understand that the football side will simply have to deal with inconvenient scheduling until a clear and obvious choice that adds value on day one is available. The Big-10 slogged through that inconvenience odd man out scheduling for almost two decades. Its not the end of the of the world. Its just an inconvenience that is temporary. A new member that flops is forever.

(12-20-2020 09:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

Im not nearly as enthusiastic toward Dayton as VCU---but I'd agree its a viable option. I prefer larger public schools when possible.

My Big East bias might be getting the best of me as I want the BE to add Dayton and Saint Louis. As such I would not be 100 percent pleased if the AAC added Dayton.

In a perfect world, I would prefer the American add BYU (or Army) for football only and VCU for Olympic sports.

(12-20-2020 09:46 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

A Dayton-Army pairing would be outstanding. But I don't see it happening. Not sure either would be interested. Army has shown no interest up to this point. Dayton would be intrigued (it has a history with some AAC programs) but ...

The "coupling" that could happen and would add instant value to the American is AppState for football only and VCU for all sports but football. Those two schools would be very interested (at least on paper).

If it's one school only: either UAB or Buffalo would be a very solid add.

Both are way too flavor of the day for me. Those are exactly the kind of "rolling the dice" picks I'd rather avoid. Let things play out. A decade from now---they might be obvious "no brainer" additions--and that would be the time to make the move---not now. Remember---there is no "premium" or reward paid to a conference for selecting the right school early in it's process of development----There is only a permanent penalty for selecting the wrong school that never reaches its potential and simply becomes an anchor around the leagues neck. In other words---there is no reason to gamble.

(12-20-2020 09:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:46 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

A Dayton-Army pairing would be outstanding. But I don't see it happening. Not sure either would be interested. Army has shown no interest up to this point. Dayton would be intrigued (it has a history with some AAC programs) but ...

The "coupling" that could happen and would add instant value to the American is AppState for football only and VCU for all sports but football. Those two schools would be very interested (at least on paper).

If it's one school only: either UAB or Buffalo would be a very solid add.

Both are way too flavor of the day for me. Those are exactly the kind of "rolling the dice" picks I'd rather avoid. Let things play out. A decade from now---they might be obvious "no brainer" additions--and that would be the time to make the move---not now. Remember---there is no "premium" or reward paid to a conference for selecting the right school early in it's process of development----There is only a permanent penalty for selecting the wrong school that never reaches its potential and simply becomes an anchor around the leagues neck. In other words---there is no reason to gamble.

The reality is the american is just like the mac mountain west sun belt and conference usa. The p5 are not gonna let you in. You can add whoever you want. It does not matter. The p5 has proven that time and time again and when they are ready to expand your meal tickets aka Cincinnati the floridas Houston and Memphis will be gone like Louisville and then you will be even more irrelevant. Those schools will drop you like a hot potato. You are triple a my friend unfortunately

(12-21-2020 08:06 AM)jaybird44 Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:46 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

A Dayton-Army pairing would be outstanding. But I don't see it happening. Not sure either would be interested. Army has shown no interest up to this point. Dayton would be intrigued (it has a history with some AAC programs) but ...

The "coupling" that could happen and would add instant value to the American is AppState for football only and VCU for all sports but football. Those two schools would be very interested (at least on paper).

If it's one school only: either UAB or Buffalo would be a very solid add.

Both are way too flavor of the day for me. Those are exactly the kind of "rolling the dice" picks I'd rather avoid. Let things play out. A decade from now---they might be obvious "no brainer" additions--and that would be the time to make the move---not now. Remember---there is no "premium" or reward paid to a conference for selecting the right school early in it's process of development----There is only a permanent penalty for selecting the wrong school that never reaches its potential and simply becomes an anchor around the leagues neck. In other words---there is no reason to gamble.

The reality is the american is just like the mac mountain west sun belt and conference usa. The p5 are not gonna let you in. You can add whoever you want. It does not matter. The p5 has proven that time and time again and when they are ready to expand your meal tickets aka Cincinnati the floridas Houston and Memphis will be gone like Louisville and then you will be even more irrelevant. Those schools will drop you like a hot potato. You are triple a my friend unfortunately

Be that as it may, the fact is the AAC has managed to create a conference value that is substantially better than the sum of its largely made in CUSA parts. The conference goal is to hopefully increase that value when replacing UConn. So no—just adding any school won’t work.

Personally, I don’t see much P5 poaching likely—mainly due to what we saw in the 2016 aborted Big12 expansion. The fact is, as conferences get larger and make more and more money (much of it from revenue sources like the CFP that do not provide pro rata increases when a conference expands) each added school must have substantially more media value than the previous addition in order for expansion to continue to be profitable to the existing members. There just aren’t any G5 members that have that kind of value these days—so, as we saw in 2016, there simply is no longer any financial incentive for P5 conference expansion using G5 parts. In fact, these days, so much value is needed to make P5 expansion profitable, that only a handful of very valuable P5 schools like Texas or Oklahoma can power expansion.

If ever there was environment that might allow a conference to develop into a lower level power conference (say on the order if the old Big East) without it’s key members being poached by the P5—the current landscape might be the closest to it we have seen in decades.

(12-20-2020 09:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:28 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 09:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-20-2020 08:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Using your analogy, the AAC is very much "gambling" right now with 11 football members. It is hoping one of the value brands sees a new light and makes a jump. To date, it not only hasn't happened but very much appears no such move will occur anytime soon. 11 members isn't sustainable for football, not because it is an odd number, but because the elephant in the room for the AAC remains the bottom of the league. UConn wasn't even in the league this year, and it still had a winless team and a one-loss team. It needs to add to its middle, competitively (and that doesn't even start with basketball). The top of the league continues to get dragged down by the perception of the bottom.

I would argue that the "plan" would be to expand (by one) in order to develop another high-quality conference athletic program. Every single AAC program is better off today than in 2013 (except arguably Cincinnati, but they are in a NY6 Bowl, so it's moot). Get another like-minded school that is within the footprint that is clearly a football-first athletic program. Getting another non-football program doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Well, first off---no AAC team was winless. Secondly---adding a team that looks like the bottom of the league is not a way to "fix" the bottom of the league.

Look---we all know somebody will always be at the bottom of the standings in any given year. The key is--you dont want it to be the same two or three teams every year. Temple is at the bottom right now---but they actually won the conference championship 4 years ago and were in the AAC CCG the year before that. So, their program is just in suffering though rebuilding. USF was undefeated and ranked just a couple of years ago---so they arent necessarily a fixture at the bottom of the conference either. ECU is struggling---but their history indicates they have the resources to be a quality program. A few years ago Tulane and SMU were down there. Both are now on the upswing and doing well.

Honestly, any current program in the AAC could be at the top of the league in couple of years. Thats good for the league. That said---a few AAC programs have shown a greater degree of consistently than the others---and thats the kind of program the AAC needs to add. Eleven is not ideal--but its fine. Its far better to temporarily deal with a little scheduling inconvenience than it is to roll the dice on a program that could very well end up being another cellar dwelling anchor around the neck of the conference that permanently damages its football reputation. When a clear and obvious #12 emerges--thats when its time to make a move.

Seems to me that the problem isn't AAC football or baseball (both of which are very healthy and stable — and even somewhat nationally relevant). It's American men's hoops, which is quickly turning into a bad situation.

I'd look at Dayton. They have the best fan support of any available program. Try to couple them with Army for football.

Im not nearly as enthusiastic toward Dayton as VCU---but I'd agree its a viable option. I prefer larger public schools when possible. I just dont think Army is interested---so I tend to think its more of a fix what you can (basketball) situation and a time to understand that the football side will simply have to deal with inconvenient scheduling until a clear and obvious choice that adds value on day one is available. The Big-10 slogged through that inconvenience odd man out scheduling for almost two decades. Its not the end of the of the world. Its just an inconvenience that is temporary. A new member that flops is forever.

Agreed. I think the last thing the AAC needs is for them to add a Dayton or SLU, only for the Big East to poach them later on (as both would much rather be in a higher basketball conference, along with institutional fits as well). The AAC can't afford to have another member taken by the Big East.

(12-19-2020 06:48 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  If GTS charged for every new AAC realignment post he’d never have to work again.

That's a great idea. If UFC can charge $9.95 to watch a fight card full of mediocre randos on your TV, that seems like a fair price for starting an AAC realignment thread.

Bonus add-on charge: $5 for every new thread with a title that ends in a question mark.